Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Vamp® - Your sweet beasts!

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 07:15, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vamp® - Your sweet beasts!

google has a hard time finding any text references to the magazine... google finds zero pages that link to the magazine (search term "link:www.vamp-magazine.com". Article creator is User:Ercsaba, which looks like a match with the magazine's editor Csaba L. Erőss. Feco 21:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) Note the similar VfD at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Vamp - Your sweet beasts!. Feco 19:02, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete this silly-titled magazine. The website exists, but has no Alexa rank at all! Likely spam, certainly non-notable. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:53, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Advert. (We actually have an article that includes the registered trademark symbol?!) Mwanner 22:02, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete any article which tries to include a registered or copyrigted mark in its title. RickK 22:26, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Hey Wikipedia, this is not a vote but I just came across this. Vamp - Your sweet beasts! (different one and it is Not Safe For Work), Amateurpussycat and Vampsexkitten. --Anonymous Cow 01:16, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Also not a vote, is a comment: I seen also the Vamp - Your sweet beasts!, and I think somebody put new information about an European magazine. My opinion is, who made, correct his/her first time errors... However, we can delete, the Hustler, Playboy and the Penthouse pages, no?... Let's think a bit more... Mozsi 04:13, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, let's see... Playboy.com has an Alexa rank of 785... the Vamp website has no Alexa rank at all (Alexa ranks the top 6 million sites or so). Pretty hard to compare notability between those two. It's kind of like saying that if a comic character I created in kindergarten doesn't get an article, then we have to delete Superman and Spiderman too. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:16, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete strictly because of the registered copyright mark on its title. I doubt that anyone would type in that mark when trying to serach for Vamp - Your sweet beasts!. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:19, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as being advertising of own magazine (see nomination) and having no Alexa rank. Hustler, Playboy and the Penthouse are in a totally different league and far wider known across the world and made it into pop culture. Mgm|^(talk) 07:55, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this and its clones as self-advertising, and I agree, anything with registered trademark symbols in its name should be an automatic candidate for deletion - a legitimate article can handle trademark issues in the article body, if needed. -- The Anome 08:00, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to the title without the registered trademark, if anyone can actually verify that this magazine is real and published in multiple languages keep, otherwise delete--nixie 08:06, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete any article with an ® in its title. Radiant_* 08:18, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - advertisement--Anonymous Cow 20:30, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for supreme non notability and ® in title. Thryduulf 16:32, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to the other Vamp and keep that one.--Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:24, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Vamp - Your sweet beasts!. Megan1967 09:37, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.